Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Act Viciously As Vigilantes

The basic claim as filed by M Pigneyguy is impossible to have happened but it was unchecked

Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Act Viciously As Vigilantes
Appellant’s Submissions in response to Submissions of Crown Law Mark Davies, Meredith Connell in opposition to Appeal against Conviction
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess
Crown Law on behalf of Maritime New Zealand, wrote in their submissions regarding Bolton’s Grounds of Appeal –
“Ground (a) That Seaway created the risk of collision.
20 : Maritime New Zealand’s case in the District Court was that Classique was the give-way vessel in the situation that developed between it & Seaway & that Classique failed to give-way. Judge Davis accepted that the case was proven by the photos M Pigneguy took & by the evidence of M Pigneguy, Barry Young, Phillip Sweetman & Ian Howden.”
The Appellant (Bolton) seeks to respond to the Crown submissions
Response 20 (a). Classique is seen in Photo 2 to be ahead of the ferry, therefore she is not a “giveway vessel” required to giveway, as she is not on the port side of the ferry.
(b) It is submitted that the evidence in the photos incriminates M Pigneyguy as does the evidence given verbally & in writing by the each of the above named witnesses
(c) For Barry Young to limit the turning of the ferry only to that 2.4 deg he wrongly calculated from the photos, is to neglect the obvious turning that happened as from Sth Motuihe prior to the taking of the photos. For M Pigneyguy to reject the turning that Barry Young admits to, reveals further inaccuracy of M Pigneyguy’s evidence.
(d) Not only is the basic claim as filed by M Pigneyguy impossible to have happened but it was unchecked as to feasibility by Maritime New Zealand (Ian Howden “No I did not check…” Trans Page152/line32)
(e) Further more the “slowing” of the ferry alleged in that claim has now become in M Pigneyguy’s evidence “a complete stop” – repeated several times, ( SD[15](d) & Trans Pages11,23,56,81,90,100.) which the Appellant & Classique’s crew, say is certainly not true and no signal of 3 short blasts (indicating stern propulsion) was given as required by the Maritime Collision Prevention Rules.
Link for Seeing, Signing & Sharing Petition – http://maritimenz.com/AnnulConvictionGainedByAbuseOfCourtProcess
Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Act Viciously As Vigilantes

Barry Young, Mark Davies, M Pigneguy, Jim Lott, Ian Howden.
Some Protagonists involved in the prosecution of the wrong skipper
Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Act Viciously As Vigilantes

Crown Law & Maritime New Zealand Act Viciously As Vigilantes

Website Pin Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati del.icio.us Digg Google StumbleUpon Premium Responsive

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge